Recent Posts
And so ends months of enormous free publicity for Watchmen, which not so long ago was deemed a marketing-challenged gamble, being that it’s an R-rated, 2 hour-plus superhero epic based on characters nobody knows. But director Zack Snyder's dark opus now enjoys intense Must See buzz thanks to the mainstream media’s intense interest in Fox’s dogged pursuit of justice, not to mention Warner Bros.' decision not resolve the matter until six weeks prior to the movie’s March 6 release, just as billboards and TV ads begin flooding the national mediasphere. Well played, folks. Well played.
Perhaps the most curious aspect of the peace pact was the joint statement issued by both studios: “Warner Bros. acknowledges that Fox acted in good faith in bringing its claims, which were asserted prior to the start of principal photography. Fox acknowledges that Warner Bros. acted in good faith in defending against those claims.” This statement is no doubt intended for fanboys and bloggers who've been hating hard on both companies throughout this mess. When the Watchmen legal fight reached the court of public opinion, the noisy-pissy geek pop lobby — already embittered toward Fox for various crimes against comicbookdom (See: Fantastic Four; Daredevil) and for showing little to zero prior interest in making a Watchmen movie itself -- wrongly charged the studio of not pressing its claims sooner in order to get maximum leverage on Warner Bros. Clearly, Fox is hoping that these well-negotiated words attributed to Warner Bros. will publicly exonerate the company for merely doing the right thing. Meanwhile, Warner Bros. -- which got spanked on Christmas Eve by a judge who said Fox "at the very least" had distribution rights to Watchmen -- got Fox to say...something. That deep down, they’re actually good eggs, I guess, even though they made a movie they had no right to make.
Whatever. The movie’s coming out. End of story.
Footnote: This entire case hinged on a contract that Fox had with Watchmen producer Larry Gordon -- a contract which Gordon told the court he couldn't properly recollect. According to the legal papers filed by Fox, Gordon always had the opportunity to buy out Fox’s stake in Watchmen at anytime. It even spelled out the terms: a cash buy out of Fox's previously accrued costs and a smaller percentage of revenues than the one Warner Bros. now has to pay. If only Gordon had remembered to honor his obligation, he could have saved Warner Bros. some money here. Oh, well. Those Warner Bros. are good egg people -- I’m sure they’ll just forgive and forget. Right?
As a writer with a english degree, Watchmen is rather sublime. It takes the standard premise of "superheros and masked vigilantes" and adds a spin that, at the time of its inception, was very cutting edge and risky: "in the real world, no sugarcoating".
The only problem is, since that point, most other comic book titles have started to mimick the concept, with varied levels of sugarcoat. X-Men is well known for this, and Spiderman is a close second. The Marvel Civil War storyarc was an example of this, and some of DC's titles have had their own versions.
Watchmen brought a sense of realism to "dudes in tights" comic books, and at the time, was quite revolutionary for it. Now, however, the story has been sort of told already...a lot.
Now, as a viewer who wants to go to a movie theater to escape the real world for a few hours, Watchmen isn't my first choice. I likely won't see it in theater, and I'll probably only catch it on video if someone I know rents it and offers to bring it over. If escapism is my goal in entertainment, I am less inclined to partake in something that's major design point is bringing reality into a normally escapist media. To me personally, it feels about as rewarding as a starving man swallowing air.
So in short:
The writer in me: Pleased to see a tribute to one of the most influential comic books of all time.
The viewer in me: Gonna save my cash for stuff like Where the Wild Things Are and Transformers 2.
Radavel
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
And for a dash of humour (Off to see the real thing later this afternoon), I present Saturday Morning Watchmen. It's very, very, very wrong, but hilarious.
I've been avoiding this thread to avoid spoilers, but I went to see it last night. (Movies open in the Czech Republic on Thursdays, so we got to see it a day early! Yay!)
Anyhoo, I was very impressed, and I say this as a HUGE fan of the Watchmen book. Of course there were some changes and omissions, but overall, it was an excellent movie, and probably the most well-done adaptation of a comic to move that I've seen.
GREAT soundtrack too!
Only two minor quibbles:
And I didn't like Dr. Manhattan's voice. It was too human. I thought it should have been deeper, or sounded more otherworldly. In the book, he talks in blue speech bubbles, which I always heard in my head as some kind of detached, computer-like voice. And he just sounded like a normal guy. Who happens to be blue.
Still, pretty minor complaints for something so big. :)
I have now seen the movie. It is incredibly faithful to the original. It is also very good. Didn't notice the time going by at all. The violence is very graphic, so be warned.
Agree with Rob's point 1. Disagree with his point 2. Manhattan's voice had an ethereal edge to it that I felt fitted perfectly.
Just went to see this film and I must say it blew my mind. I had so high expectations for this film and been waiting for it for years. They said it couldn't be filmed. They were wrong. This is along with Sin City is the most faithful comic book adaptation I have ever seen. The characters were spot on (even Ozymandias, although he did look different in the comic I think the actor really pulled it off.) I think this will pretty much be the best movie I see all year.
Radavel
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
I'm just going to say this...what's with all the blue penis?Yeah, I was getting a bit sick of the digital dong after awhile.
Frankly I am kind of surprised the movie doesn't have an NC-17 rating.
I'll put everything in spoilers to save those who haven't viewed the film...
Besides all those shenanigans, I've never read the comic, so I must have not been channeling the fan vibes, since I wasn't blown away by its story. The cinematography was quite excellent, though.
Good movie, great soundtrack with the exception of that godawful rendition of Hallelujah, but...ahm...ah, I'm just going to say this...what's with all the blue penis?
Jon is naked because he no longer operates as a human. He forgets clothes, like he forgets that people breathe. He is the apotheosis of the super, and is completely open in his power. Daniel is the opposite, feeling naked and unformed without his suit. The impotence he feels is part of living in the shadow of Manhattan.
Saw it. Fracking loved it. Not a perfect movie, but an awesome rendition of Watchmen. Very much for the fanboi, and will leave people scratching their heads if they expect a linear narrative in three acts and a baddie who dies, and a goodie who gets the girl.
Frame perfect. Awesome work by Snyder. He still has a long way to go as a director. This is his third film. If he can start to get his movies to cohere, rather than be montages of awesome moments, he will be a director of note.
I loved the movie despite a few flaws, and will see it a few more times on the screen.
I am really really looking forward to the director's cut, which puts the Tales of the Black Freighter into the movie.
Ok so I just got back from watching the movie and here are a few thoughts:
1.> Had a LOT more nudity and sex than I expected (better done than in some movies, not as well as in others).
2.> Didn't really build up the connections between the different characters, or even really show them off. It was mostly just assumed that the characters where already connected, alright for a fanboy, but I had to assume by inference that these people where important to each other.
3.> The movie, though it starts with The Comedian, is really about Rosheck (spelling I know :p).
4.> It didn't feel that long, but it could have done with a little more "umpf" in places... took a while to hit the "superhero" level.
5.> Did NOT like the ending... it felt off to me somehow, but at the same time the ending was entirely appropriate to the movie as presented. It's plot issues for me but that's me.
All in all I wish I had more time to spend on the Watchmen comics/history now, but only if it meets the general quality of the film. I know next to nothing about Watchmen and this movie did a good job of making me want to rectify that.
Ok so I just got back from watching the movie and here are a few thoughts:
1.> Had a LOT more nudity and sex than I expected (better done than in some movies, not as well as in others).
2.> Didn't really build up the connections between the different characters, or even really show them off. It was mostly just assumed that the characters where already connected, alright for a fanboy, but I had to assume by inference that these people where important to each other.
3.> The movie, though it starts with The Comedian, is really about Rosheck (spelling I know :p).
4.> It didn't feel that long, but it could have done with a little more "umpf" in places... took a while to hit the "superhero" level.
5.> Did NOT like the ending... it felt off to me somehow, but at the same time the ending was entirely appropriate to the movie as presented. It's plot issues for me but that's me.All in all I wish I had more time to spend on the Watchmen comics/history now, but only if it meets the general quality of the film. I know next to nothing about Watchmen and this movie did a good job of making me want to rectify that.
Comic Book is better. IMHO. Although be prepared for a couple of reads to make all the threads tie together, especially the Black Pirate which was left out of the movie. It was about as bloody and naked as I expected from the comic and it was a well-deserved 18 certificate.
EDIT: Also the ending is almost exactly the same as the book, so if you don't like it, you'll have the same issues with the book itself.
Frankly I am kind of surprised the movie doesn't have an NC-17 rating.
Thats what my wife and I were saying. Some of the fight sences (especially against the Knot Tops) were BRUTAL .
I'm also not going to lie. I almost cried at the end of it. It was so faithful. There were "fanboy" things I didn't like about it, but otherwise we're going to see it again!
Frankly I am kind of surprised the movie doesn't have an NC-17 rating.Thats what my wife and I were saying. Some of the fight sences (especially against the Knot Tops) were BRUTAL .
I'm also not going to lie. I almost cried at the end of it. It was so faithful. There were "fanboy" things I didn't like about it, but otherwise we're going to see it again!
It had an 18 rating in the UK.
I saw this movie yesterday, and by and large I loved it (Although I found the actor playing Ozymandias rather uninspiring).
I never read the original graphic novel so I can't really comment on that, but I might pick it up now just for the sake of comparison (Actually I almost picked it up at Borders when I was in New York last month, and I'm still beating myself up for letting it slip).
As for the mature content, it isn't something that bothers me at all, but what does bother me is that it is rater "Age 15" in Norway, which means that 12-year olds can get in to see it if supervised by an adult, which is in my opinion far too young for this movie, this movie is very dark even without the violence and the nudity. Just think of Rorsach's flashback (if you've seen it, you know which one I'm talking about), is that something a 12-year old has the ability to process?
Good movie, great soundtrack with the exception of that godawful rendition of Hallelujah,
Are you aware that is the original Leonard Cohen version?
Just think of Rorsach's flashback (if you've seen it, you know which one I'm talking about), is that something a 12-year old has the ability to process?
I knew two sisters in grade school who watched horror movies with their parents at about that age. Their parents explained to them that it was just pretend and they took it alright. I suppose they could have grown up to be cereal killers, but I did visit one of them recently and didn't notice any dismembered parts in her home.
Man, she makes great chili! She never did tell me what mystery meat she used in it though...
Good movie, great soundtrack with the exception of that godawful rendition of Hallelujah,Are you aware that is the original Leonard Cohen version?
Yeah, unfortunately being the first one to sing a song doesn't mean you're the best at singing it.
What do you think their favorite kind of cereal to kill would be? Cornflakes? Shreddies? Cheerios? (sorry, couldn't resist)
Just think of Rorsach's flashback (if you've seen it, you know which one I'm talking about), is that something a 12-year old has the ability to process?I knew two sisters in grade school who watched horror movies with their parents at about that age. Their parents explained to them that it was just pretend and they took it alright. I suppose they could have grown up to be cereal killers, but I did visit one of them recently and didn't notice any dismembered parts in her home.
Man, she makes great chili! She never did tell me what mystery meat she used in it though...
Yeah, unfortunately being the first one to sing a song doesn't mean you're the best at singing it.Good movie, great soundtrack with the exception of that godawful rendition of Hallelujah,Are you aware that is the original Leonard Cohen version?
I saw it yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it!
Changes were to be expected and most I saw as in keeping with the original vision, just in a more movieish telling.
There were a couple of things I was disappointed they changed, but other than the ending I saw no really major changes, just ommissions (which is also understandable give the scope of the Graphic Novel).
I can't see this being beaten at the movies for me this year.
deathboy
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
i will say only 2 things about this movie...
1) its a piece... of ART... few things are so beautiful than Watchemn so well adaptated to the movies... also the action scenes BRUTAL as they were enhanced the movie... there was nothing so anti climatic than the last fight in the comic...
2) this movie is about the comedian, he dies first and he still the movie... he is the line that joins everything... the others are just telling the story
PS: I disagree Ozymandias is perfect, gay but perfect for the roll, in the comic he was a mass of muscle... but the truth is that he didn't needed. his personality is that of the GN, you know why he is so good in what he does... smartest man in the world... and the better trained... he is what Batman could have been if taking it lightly and with a lot more agression. Ironman only has the smartest thing :P
Ok so I just got back from watching the movie and here are a few thoughts:
1.> Had a LOT more nudity and sex than I expected (better done than in some movies, not as well as in others).
2.> Didn't really build up the connections between the different characters, or even really show them off. It was mostly just assumed that the characters where already connected, alright for a fanboy, but I had to assume by inference that these people where important to each other.
3.> The movie, though it starts with The Comedian, is really about Rosheck (spelling I know :p).
4.> It didn't feel that long, but it could have done with a little more "umpf" in places... took a while to hit the "superhero" level.
5.> Did NOT like the ending... it felt off to me somehow, but at the same time the ending was entirely appropriate to the movie as presented. It's plot issues for me but that's me.All in all I wish I had more time to spend on the Watchmen comics/history now, but only if it meets the general quality of the film. I know next to nothing about Watchmen and this movie did a good job of making me want to rectify that.
Comic Book is better. IMHO. Although be prepared for a couple of reads to make all the threads tie together, especially the Black Pirate which was left out of the movie. It was about as bloody and naked as I expected from the comic and it was a well-deserved 18 certificate.
EDIT: Also the ending is almost exactly the same as the book, so if you don't like it, you'll have the same issues with the book itself.
I don't have to like the ending to accept it's the right one for the piece of art in question. I agree it's the right ending for "watchmen" I just don't think it's the correctly premissed over all.
Radavel
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
I should know better than to see a big budget movie in March. If they thought it was good, they'd be releasing it during the summer.
The graphic novel is awesome, one of the best of the medium. The film has terrible sound design, suffers from five exposition-heavy origin stories, and de-politicizes the ending of the graphic novel. And, no, the ending is completely and utterly different from the comic novel. The only thing that stays the same is that there's a lot of dead people and a boom near the end.
The cinematography is stunning, however.
Alan Moore will likely be pissed once again.
I knew two sisters in grade school who watched horror movies with their parents at about that age. Their parents explained to them that it was just pretend and they took it alright. I suppose they could have grown up to be cereal killers, but I did visit one of them recently and didn't notice any dismembered parts in her home.
Yes, but were Tony the Tiger and Toucan Sam still alive?
Yes, but were Tony the Tiger and Toucan Sam still alive?
I knew two sisters in grade school who watched horror movies with their parents at about that age. Their parents explained to them that it was just pretend and they took it alright. I suppose they could have grown up to be cereal killers, but I did visit one of them recently and didn't notice any dismembered parts in her home.
Good question. As far as I known Count Chocula was always suspected of being a cereal killer, but I've got a database that tracks the residential moves made by citizens and compares them against spates of pattern slayings and the Cocoa Puffs bird has lived in five towns that only saw slayings while he lived there. I believe he's the real 'Killogg's killer'.
I should know better than to see a big budget movie in March. If they thought it was good, they'd be releasing it during the summer.
The graphic novel is awesome, one of the best of the medium. The film has terrible sound design, suffers from five exposition-heavy origin stories, and de-politicizes the ending of the graphic novel. And, no, the ending is completely and utterly different from the comic novel. The only thing that stays the same is that there's a lot of dead people and a boom near the end.
The cinematography is stunning, however.
Alan Moore will likely be pissed once again.
I think Alan Moore would be pissed even if the movie was 100% accurate and the script was word for word.
He's a good writer, but far too stuck on himself.